Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38842614›Full record

ArticlePediatric radiology2024

Impact of a 6-12-h delay between ileocolic intussusception diagnostic US and fluoroscopic reduction on patients' outcomes.

Julian Lopez-Rippe, J Christopher Davis, Rebecca A Dennis, Summer L Kaplan, Jorge Delgado

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Pediatric radiology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Manual Detorsion by Pediatric Emergency Physicians Shortens Ischemia Time in Pediatric Testicular Torsion.Academic emergency medicine : official journal of the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Pediatric intussusception: innovative reduction.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Julian Lopez-RippeDepartment of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
J Christopher DavisDepartment of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Rebecca A DennisDepartment of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Summer L KaplanDepartment of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Jorge DelgadoDepartment of Radiology, Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, 3401 Civic Center Blvd, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA. delgadoj@chop.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-2887-8064

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImage-guided reduction of intussusception is considered a radiologic urgency requiring 24-h radiologist and technologist availability.

objectiveTo assess whether a delay of 6-12 h between US diagnosis and fluoroscopic reduction of ileocolic intussusception affects the success frequency of fluoroscopic reduction. MATERIALS AND

methodsRetrospective review of 0-5-year-olds undergoing fluoroscopic reduction for ileocolic intussusception from 2013 to 2023. Exclusions were small bowel intussusception, self-reduced intussusception, first fluoroscopic reduction attempt>12 h after US, prior bowel surgery, inpatient status, and patient transferred for recurrent intussusception. Data collected included demographics, symptoms, air/contrast enema selection, radiation dose, reduction failure, 48-h recurrence, surgery, length of stay, and complications. Comparisons between<6-h and 6-12-h delays after ultrasound diagnosis were made using chi-square, Fisher's exact test, and Mann-Whitney U tests (P< 0.05 considered significant).

resultsOf 438 included patients, 387 (88.4%) were reduced in <6 h (median age 1.4 years) and 51 (11.7%) were reduced between 6 and 12 h (median age 2.05 years), with median reduction times of 1:42 and 7:07 h, respectively. There were no significant differences between the groups for reduction success (<6 h 87.3% vs. 6-12 h 94.1%; P-value = 0.16), need for surgery (<6 h 11.1% vs. 6-12 h 3.9%; P-value=0.112), recurrence of intussusception within 48 h after reduction (<6 h 9.3% vs. 6-12 h 15.7%; P-value=0.154), or length of hospitalization (<6 h 21:07 h vs. 6-12 h 20:03 h; P-value=0.662).

conclusionA delay of 6-12 h between diagnosis and fluoroscopic reduction of ileocolic intussusception is not associated with reduced fluoroscopic reduction success, need for surgical intervention after attempted reduction, recurrence of intussusception following successful reduction, or hospitalization duration after reduction.

Indexed as

Ileal DiseasesIntussusceptionChild, PreschoolFemaleFluoroscopyHumansInfantInfant, NewbornMaleRetrospective StudiesTime FactorsTime-to-TreatmentTreatment OutcomeUltrasonographyFailed reductionFluoroscopic reductionIleocolic intussusceptionOutcomesRecurrence

Identifiers

PMID38842614
PMCPMC11254962

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.